Attendance
- Tanner Nelson
- Tom Doron
- Kaitlin Mahar
- Peter Adams
- Simon Pilkington
- Todd Varland
Swift has announced that it will be moving to the name “main” for default branches. The SSWG will follow suit by moving all repositories it owns to use this pattern including swift-backtrace, guides, sswg, and async-http-client (action: @tomerd, @ktoso). Going forward, the SSWG believes that Swift’s code of conduct should have guidelines on appropriate coding terminology. Tom will request this (action: @tomerd).
Tanner brought up a need for additional cryptographic functionality not currently available in swift-crypto (which mirrors Apple’s CryptoKit). The currently accepted pattern for implementing cryptographic functions is to vendor an internal copy of BoringSSL. This is not ideal as the number of copies of BoringSSL continues to grow, increasing binary size and slowing down compile times. Adding the necessary functionality to the swift-crypto repository would solve this problem. However, there are concerns that such functionality may be unsafe or not fit well with CryptoKit’s goals. It may be possible to define focused, safe APIs that solve library needs and fit well with CryptoKit. Tanner will create a forum post to discuss this in more detail and get a feeling for what the community needs most (action: @tanner0101).
The SSWG will review package index incubation statuses next meeting. There was some confusion about the difference between “incubating” and “graduation” levels. Tom noted that it may be worth refactoring these slightly (action: @tomerd).